Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Middle-earth rivers

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy keep as AFD started by banned user. Will ^(talk) 16:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Middle-earth rivers

Wikipedia is not a list, serves no sueful purpose, not notable Cholga^talK! 17:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-per nomCholga^talK! 17:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'd say the purpose of the list would be both information and navigation as per WP:LIST. Also as to notability Tolkiens Middle-earth has been written about extensively.--Cube lurker (talk) 17:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This list clearly fits under policy on stand-alone lists. It organizes articles on the subject so a person trying to get more information could have an easy list of wikiarticles, rather than trying to scour for each article individually.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 17:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems useful and quite notable, given how notable Middle-earth is. —BorgHunter (talk) 20:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Actually, Wikipedia does have lists, and guidelines on how to write them. —Quasirandom (talk) 22:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, satisfies WP:CLS by being organized and informational. --Dhartung | Talk 22:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, "Wikipedia is not a list" is not a valid argument to nominate an article for deletion. Wikipedia is not an article either. 96T (talk) 22:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I wouldn't quite call this cruft, it passes WP:CLS, but highly specialized fictional "in-universe" information such as this isn't encyclopedic, and belongs on a Fansite or an LotR themed Wiki. Middle Earth in it of itself definitely notable, but in my opinion this goes a little far. Mr Senseless (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I believe it satisfies CLS -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the Legendarium is so huge that you need lists like this to not overload the main articles. As for notability, we can use Atlas of Middle-Earth for a start Will ^(talk) 01:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - very useful as information structure. Eithin (talk) 13:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment By the way, even minor Middle-Earth stuff has recieved lots of indepentent coverage, just look at the high number of unoffical Tolkien encyclopedias out there. The Complete Guide to Middle-earth is one example, and it has entries for many (if not all) of these rivers. 96T (talk) 17:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Nomination is by a confirmed sockpuppet, whose recent deletion spree was part of the abusive behavior that got him indefinitely blocked.[1] Wikidemo (talk) 18:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.